PRO-LIFE WARNING TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY

A 2004 pro-life thread brought back to life | 11-13-04 | Vicomte13

[cpforlife.org]

PRO-LIFE WARNING TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY

We believe that abortion is infanticide, and that a holocaust of infants is taking place. We do not believe that there is any other issue on Earth that compares with abortion in moral import. And therefore, there is no policy or combination of policies you Republicans can offer, including perfect tax policies, tort reform, and every other thing that is near and dear to Republican hearts, that matters a damn if abortion is overlooked and allowed to slide by.

We know that this issue has to be settled in the Supreme Court, nowhere else. And we know that the opportunity to put new justices on the court comes once in a decade, maybe, and that the current opportunity to alter the complexion of the court is not going to come again for a generation. Therefore, the real possibility exists that abortion can finally be seriously curtailed, soon, by the Supreme Court changing Roe v. Wade or eliminating it...IF, and ONLY IF, we can get pro-life judges on that court.

To do that, we have trusted the Republicans for years. We just came out and voted for you again this time, in unprecedented numbers, because we are not stupid and we know what is at stake. Not just evangelicals either. The religious CATHOLIC vote went Republican in 2004, and they didn't do it because of trade policy or even gay marriage. Their issue is abortion.

And the overriding issue is abortion.

So, if the Republicans allow Senator Specter to get the Chair of the Judiciary Committee and he blocks pro-life nominees, or if the Republicans do not use the nuclear option to override Democrat filibusters of pro-life nominees, THIS TIME there is no place for Republicans to hide. WE KNOW that you have the power, now, because WE just voted to give it to you. We understand that you can block Specter. And we understand the nuclear option.

And therefore, we most certainly will understand that if you allow the pro-life judges to be blocked, that it will be your political CHOICE to have done so. You CAN put pro-life judges on the bench, if you expend a lot of political capital. This will offend some people - a lot of people. And that is the price you HAVE to pay to get our votes next time. You have to be willing to bet the whole house to end infanticide.

If not, we will not vote for you. We won't go running to vote for the Democrats: they're pro-abortion. We won't go out and form a third party: we're not stupid and know that won't work. We'll just stay home, just like we did in 2000. Except that in 2000 it was out of frustration and neglect, and the lack of belief that anything will change. There was no organized campaign to keep the pro-life vote home in 2000.

This time, it's different. We understand the system, and we know that you have the power. And we demand that you use the power straight down the line to fill the high court and the appellate courts with judges who will protect the lives of babies. Period. This is not negotiable. At all. This is why we voted for you. You have nothing with which to bargain with us, and if you screw us, we will stay organized and we will stay home purposely to destroy the Republican party. Because if you do not protect the babies when you have the power to do it, you are no better than the Democrats...and worse, you will have lied to us.

This means, in effect, that all of those things YOU care most about: taxation, immigration, trade and business policy, deregulation - all of those core issues that come as an economic package, are held hostage to our issue: babies. If you will not protect the babies, we will stay home and let the Democrats destroy everything that YOU believe in.

This is called "Chicken". It is called a "Mexican Standoff". And since we are fired up by the certitude that we are doing God's work in defending babies, we cannot be bought, and you cannot win so much as an election for dog catcher in this country without us.

Therefore, the solution is simple and obvious: give us what we voted for you to do. Give us pro-life judges. Use all of your power to do it. Sweep Specter out of the way: is he worth losing all the rest of your agenda? - because we really will stay home and throw the country to the Democrats if you're no better than they are on abortion, just to punish YOU for having betrayed us. When the filibusters come, and they will come, use the nuclear option to override them. That will poison the Senate, yes. So what? We are talking about babies here. And with our votes, militantly mobilized because we are winning, alongside of yours, in 2006 and 2008 and beyond, even if the Senate is poisoned, you will be able to replace it with a more Republican one.

That there is even a debate going on as to what to do with Specter is alarming, but we have had our hearts broken before, so we'll sit and pray and trust President Bush and Senator Frist and the Republicans to do the right thing.

Screw us, though, and we will turn on you and your whole agenda will go down the drain with the blood of the babies you wouldn't put your power on the line to save.

The easy solution, the win-win solution, is to BE as pro-life as you campaigned as being. Just do it.

I apologize for the length of this post. But it needed to be said. The Republicans do not seem to get it. They need to understand that we are more committed to saving babies than we are to the fortunes of the Republican Party. That Specter is still in play demonstrates that too many of them do not take this seriously.

Rather than test us, what you guys should do is simply cave, now, and give us what we want. Do that, and you wont hear from us again - there will be no creeping theocracy in America - because this is about the only religious issue that Catholics and Orthodox and Evangelicals AGREE on.

[Cold Heat]

LOL! I think I may need to get a second wind going.

[A Jovial Cad]

*Snicker? Eating a candy bar, Bub? ... Your condescending disdain is familiar, but your chosen moniker leaves little to guesswork when your posts spittle forth*

Cry me a river, MHG...

*The missing "r" is due to arthritic hands*

Ask questions or "reply" with a civil tongue, and you'll get decent discourse from me. Don't, and expect to get a dose of the same you dish out, "arthritic hands" or no. You didn't. It's as simple as that.

[MHGinTN]

Are we now to bow to you, your lowness?

[Syncro]

The poster was letting me know that the death penalty was not murder and therefore was OK and righteous in Gods eyes.

I cannot even recall what I said to start it, but I do not believe the death penalty is proper and I don't think it will be around much longer. Perhaps no longer than abortion on demand.

Well IMO (from Bible teachings) the death penalty is a valid response to some actions.

Tell me this. I don't know you, even if you are male or female. But if you have (or hypothetically have) a child and someone grabbed your child and started the process of killing him or her, what would you do?
If you had to kill the person to stop him from killing your child, would you do it? And would that be murder?
Or the properly applied "death penalty"?

The point I am getting at here is that there is a difference between murder and killing. The killing of zygotes fetuses babies is the killing of the innocent, the death penalty is the killing of the guilty.

The Bible (being as that is the authority we are using) differentiates between the two to the n^th degree.

You see, that changed the commandment to "thou shall not murder" and therefore justified the death penalty.

That is right.

[A Jovial Cad]

LOL...yep, it can get like a Marathon. But it's important to refute the personal attacks which are used as a substitution for cogent debate by a certain strain of poster such as "cpforlife.org." The only time I walked away from such a steadfast refutation here at FR, I instantly--and to this day--regretted it.
The irony is that as a steadfast pro-lifer myself, I agree with much of what the original post was all about as regards holding our Party to account when it comes to such issues. I disagree with the childish presentation & challenge, and object strongly (as my STILL unanswered original question made clear) to some of the language used to advance it; but all in all I'm on board with the pro-life agenda, at least as far as it concerns overturning *Roe vs. Wade* and returning the entire matter of abortion policy to the states, where it belongs.
But as long as "cpforlife" is game to the personal attacks charade, so am I. I'll refute every such smarmy post one by one.

[lara]

No, Howlin. You try to give the rest of us a bad name. We're decent, hard working people, who happen to believe that the pre-born should be allowed to live. And some of us believe that issue is worth fighting for. Without life, what else matters? And that's why so many pro-life people also support Bush in the war against terrorism.

[Syncro]

you refuse to answer the question: just what kind of so-called "Christian" uses the phrase "Screw"--in any of it's scummy variants--in a public forum that can be seen by the world? Perhaps, in your vision of Christianity, such a legitimate question is seen as "whining"; I doubt that any genuine Pastor, Reverend, or Priest in the world would share that extraordinary view of how Christians are supposed to deport themselves in public with such language, which pretty much says it all.

Yes it does say it all. Thanks for pointing that out, Jovial Cad (cad: a man who acts with deliberate disregard for another's feelings or rights.)

You can't answer the question, so you're reduced, pathetically, to digging up the questioner's previous posts and pinging others to share your impotent rage at having been so cornered

You crack me up! LOL

It seems to me that the "questioner's" previous posts showed that the beam is in his/her eye.

...did you even *ONCE* run across a similar employment by *me* of such guttersnipe vocabulary? That'd be a big Negatory, as you well know...

Well, that may be true, but you are slamming someone that posted a thread written by SOMEBODY else for one word in it.
Screw. There I said it. I am not a Christian now.

But you have no problem supporting a Christian who "swears like a sailor?"

I haven't seen you professing to be a Christian, so I would surmize your *snickers* are OK.

... have you ever run across who are comfortable with the use of the word "Screw" in daily--and highly public--discourse? Met many lately? Me neither...(snicker)...

So "snicker" girl, are you comfortable with someone swearing like a sailor and demeaning others by snickering at them?

[JeffAtlanta]

The point I am getting at here is that there is a difference between murder and killing. The killing of zygotes fetuses babies is the killing of the innocent, the death penalty is the killing of the guilty.

But God has instructed men to kill innocents (at least by our standards) before. This is one area that invalidates using scripture in a discussion on abortion policy.

[Cold Heat]

Well, that flies in the face of what I have come to believe.

No, I believe self defense is appropriate now, and I even have determined that it will take some time to get away from using the death penalty, but let me explain how I came to this conclusion as briefly as I am able.

When the state takes the life of a convicted felon, the original intent was to deter crime.

I no longer believe this to be working as a deterrent.

Secondly, it cheapens life. It makes it(killing) OK by state sanction.

I believe it is also too easy. What did the criminal suffer. What will he/she ever know now about the pain they inflicted on others.

If everyone learned to respect life, there would be no killing.

Respect is taught by example.

This is far from a perfect world. It could be better, and it will be.

But I made the choice to begin and I lead by example. Social changes and morays take time. A great deal of time to learn, change and adapt.

God is patient and so am I.

Many on this idiotic thread have totally misrepresented my patience as indifference.

I assure you, that is not the case. But, I do not need to convince them of any sincerity, because this is a really stupid thread.

[Syncro]

But God has instructed men to kill innocents (at least by our standards) before. This is one area that invalidates using scripture in a discussion on abortion policy.

Well you do have a point there. But from what I read from the scriptures, the "innocent" that God instructed men to kill in the OT were not in God's view "innocent."

And this is a major point: (at least by our standards)

In my take on it, the people that were wiped out by God in the OT were people that had over and over again gone against God, to the point that even their children and animals needed to be killed.

Now I don't agree with God here (LOL waiting for lightning bolt) but I have to assume that He knows what he is doing no matter what I think.

So IMHO scripture does belong in a discussion of abortion policy.

[JeffAtlanta]

We're decent, hard working people, who happen to believe that the pre-born should be allowed to live. And some of us believe that issue is worth fighting for. Without life, what else matters?

This isn't what cpforlife.org is fighting for. He even has a problem with Bush's choice for Attorney General because he perceives him as pro-choice. The pro-choice label is highly dubious and its even more ridiculous since the AG position has a nothing to do with being pro-choice or pro-life.

The problem is when abortion policy is the #1 issue. As covered earlier in this thread, it will be political suicide if the republicans try to make being anti-abortion a requirement for any political appointments. The "abortion is #1" crowd won't leave but it will scare away enough voters that the party will be a minority anyway. This is why Alan Keyes can't get elected but Arlen Specter can.

[A Jovial Cad]

And STILL the original question goes unanswered: met many so-called "Christians" who use the word "Screw" in daily discourse? Me neither...(snicker)....I guess the question is just beyond the mental range of such as are "replying" on the curiously absent "cpforlife"'s behalf...no surprise there, either. ...(snicker, again)...

BTW, I noticed the attempt in your Sig line to mock mine: that's par for the course for such specimens as yourself, and I've come to expect such scummy tactics from your ilk. But you should know, just for the record, that that Sig line "I had no shoes and I complained, until I saw a man who had no feet," was a motto my grandfather picked up, and cherished till the end of his life, during the time of his service in a fighter squadron in the Pacific during WW II. Now that you've been informed of that, I'm sure you'll do the decent thing and stop trying to mock it, since it has nothing to do with our current debate, and only "ridicules" honorable, departed veterans who served their country...but perhaps I expect too much...

[Cold Heat]

In my take on it, the people that were wiped out by God in the OT were people that had over and over again gone against God, to the point that even their children and animals needed to be killed

I wonder why that would be so? What did this society do to make him so angry?

I really don't need to wonder, I know, and it looks much as it does today.

Better duck!

I gotta go now. I have things to do. But preparation for the end of times is not one of them. I am and have been prepared.

Waitin for the zot.

Take care.

[A Jovial Cad]

"...because this is a really stupid thread"

You said it true, and are exactly right; I'm still astonished at the facile arrogance of many of the so-called "Christians" I've run across in this thread...we must be reading different Bibles.

[narses]

LOL, what 'demands'? Either the GOP is honest or it isn't. If it isn't, why would you embrace it? I certainly won't. As for the rest of your illogival rant, like your math, it is suspect.

[ladyinred]

Thank you for posting the pictures of the babies. I wish those could be seen by everyone, then perhaps we would make even greater strides against abortion than changing laws can do. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it is moral. How someone could say that is just an egg is beyond me.

[JeffAtlanta]

In my take on it, the people that were wiped out by God in the OT were people that had over and over again gone against God, to the point that even their children and animals needed to be killed. So IMHO scripture does belong in a discussion of abortion policy.

Respectfully, this is what scares people. Most democrats are not practicing Christians and a large percentages Republicans aren't' either. Once people hear that policy is being made by scripture, it really scares them. It scares them enough that they change parties and vote the pro-lifers out of power.

By our standards, the people that Saul was told to kill were innocent. The battle was over, the opposing army wiped out and the city unguarded - only women (some pregnant) and children were there. Basically it was the final solution.

I trust that God knew what he was doing too, but I think that this exposes that man doesn't always understand what is right and wrong when it comes to killing. In some cases what we would consider murder is condoned by God in the bible.

Right or wrong, the image that the "abortion must be banned at all cost" crowd projects is one in which a Taliban type government is installed to keep the people moral. In this government the bible is the supreme law of the land, not the constitution.

By citing scripture and bloody babies, these people hurt their cause much more than they help it. I resent that I then become guilty by association.

[Syncro]

Thank you for the polite and reasoned reply.

The OT explains why God was so angry, and reading it makes it clear why He did what He did.

Waiting for the zot

The Rapture? LOL

Take care.

You too...

[cpforlife.org]

A Jovial Cad, I hope for this to be my final post to you.

I will answer your question: "how many so-called "Christians" have you ever run across who are comfortable with the use of the word "Screw"...."

Few that were "comfortable" using it. None of us are perfect, and I have heard Christians use all manner of foul language and have seen Just men fall very far. I myself am a flawed Christian, though I continue to try through His grace.

I don't however harp whine and nitpick at what is to me utter nonsense in light of the subject matter (Forest for Trees). If you think it's THAT important, badger the author of the thread for an answer; and I suppose an apology and severe penance.

The author of the thread seems to be a very sincere Pro-Lifer who wants to end the holocaust of abortion. He's new at FR and did not feel comfortable posting a vanity so quickly, so I offered to, because I agreed with the message and thought it needed exposure. And boy has it gotten exposure. I did not grill him about every word. Ending abortion is far more important than such stupid nonsense.

I prefer to try to be constructive with what I've got to work with and not tear other Pro-Lifers down because they're not perfect. I AM VERY FAR FROM PERFECT.

I now ask that you stop posting to me.

Goodbye and God bless

[JeffAtlanta]

Thank you for posting the pictures of the babies. I wish those could be seen by everyone, then perhaps we would make even greater strides against abortion than changing laws can do.

Photos like that do more harm than good. See how far the PETA crowd got with the same technique.